PDA

View Full Version : Justin Amash: I won't vote for Trump




Origanalist
02-29-2016, 10:11 PM
704414122646044672

bubbleboy
02-29-2016, 10:22 PM
Says alot about you Justin.

Rudeman
02-29-2016, 10:24 PM
Says alot about you Justin.

A lot of good things. Oh wait you're a Trump supporter...

GunnyFreedom
02-29-2016, 10:34 PM
So where is the fucktard gallery to call Justin Amash a liberal Hillary supporter?

Oh wait, they are already starting their idiocy.

Origanalist
02-29-2016, 10:36 PM
Says alot about you Justin.

Indeed it does. It's most welcome to see there are sane people left on this planet.

Brett85
02-29-2016, 10:37 PM
I'm certainly not surprised. The abuse of executive power is a huge issue for Justin, and on that issue Trump will likely be even worse than Obama.

Rad
02-29-2016, 10:37 PM
He still had to step in it: http://truthinmedia.com/congressman-justin-amash-endorses-ted-cruz-president/

Krugminator2
02-29-2016, 10:38 PM
Mark Sanford not too keen on voting for Trump either. http://onpoint.wbur.org/2016/02/29/mark-sanford-donald-trump http://atr.rollcall.com/sanford-says-cruz-endorsement-trump/

thoughtomator
02-29-2016, 10:39 PM
Someone's come down with a bad case of D.C. Disease.

Brett85
02-29-2016, 10:39 PM
He still had to step in it: http://truthinmedia.com/congressman-justin-amash-endorses-ted-cruz-president/

Sure, he was the only decent option left in the race after Rand dropped out. It's not like he endorsed Cruz over Rand.

cajuncocoa
02-29-2016, 10:43 PM
We are witnessing the end of the Republican Party. (Giggles)

Rudeman
02-29-2016, 10:43 PM
Sure, he was the only decent option left in the race after Rand dropped out. It's not like he endorsed Cruz over Rand.

Yea Amash and Massie endorsed Rand early on.

jct74
03-04-2016, 05:15 PM
704712817690152961

William Tell
03-04-2016, 05:28 PM
We are witnessing the end of the Republican Party. (Giggles)

No we are not. Where would the non democrat voters go at this point?

r3volution 3.0
03-04-2016, 06:56 PM
Glad to hear it.

Warlord
03-06-2016, 03:20 PM
I'm proud of Amash!

Feelgood
03-06-2016, 03:37 PM
We are witnessing the end of the Republican Party. (Giggles)

I hate Trump and would never vote for him, but I have to say, watching him level and destroy the GOP due to rules imposed of their own volition, it truly does tickle my funny bone. :)

erowe1
03-06-2016, 04:34 PM
Man. I respect Amash.

erowe1
03-06-2016, 04:35 PM
I hate Trump and would never vote for him, but I have to say, watching him level and destroy the GOP due to rules imposed of their own volition, it truly does tickle my funny bone. :)

What rules?

The reason he's beating them so far is because he's been getting the most people to vote for him.

erowe1
03-06-2016, 04:37 PM
Someone's come down with a bad case of D.C. Disease.

Right. Amash must be a CFR puppet if he doesn't want the next president to be someone who may have him arrested for his political views.

FindLiberty
03-06-2016, 04:52 PM
If Trump is truly focused on making America great again (as a political objective),
and is willing to back up and try another approach if results are unfavorable
(e.g., blow back and obvious disaster from suddenly stepping up gov size and coercion),
maybe he can actually find liberty. [coughs into closed hand]

TheTexan
03-06-2016, 05:02 PM
If he doesn't vote for the Republican nominee, thats like not voting at all, which can only mean one of two things:
1) he hates America, and/or
2) hes a closet Hillary supporter

Cabal
03-06-2016, 05:46 PM
704712817690152961

Didn't he endorse Cruz, who has been talking about "utterly carpet bombing" and "saturation bombing" for months now?

Brett85
03-06-2016, 07:24 PM
704712817690152961

Didn't he endorse Cruz, who has been talking about "utterly carpet bombing" and "saturation bombing" for months now?

Yeah, but no one is calling Cruz a non interventionist. There are liberty people who have been claiming that Trump supports a non interventionist foreign policy.

Libertas Aut Mortis
03-06-2016, 09:01 PM
If he doesn't vote for the Republican nominee, thats like not voting at all, which can only mean one of two things:
1) he hates America, and/or
2) hes a closet Hillary supporter


Now I understand Tex....

Cabal
03-06-2016, 10:04 PM
Yeah, but no one is calling Cruz a non interventionist.

And that makes Cruz's interventionism and Justin's endorsement of Cruz, despite his criticism of interventionism okay and consistent how?

Brett85
03-07-2016, 07:39 AM
And that makes Cruz's interventionism and Justin's endorsement of Cruz, despite his criticism of interventionism okay and consistent how?

Because obviously you don't have to agree with someone on every single issue in order to support or endorse them.

LibertyEagle
03-07-2016, 08:40 AM
A lot of good things. Oh wait you're a Trump supporter...

You consider it good that he's supporting Cruz? Cruz is pure establishment and can't wait to pass more disastrous trade deals that will drive even more business and jobs out of the country.

LibertyEagle
03-07-2016, 08:41 AM
Yeah, but no one is calling Cruz a non interventionist. There are liberty people who have been claiming that Trump supports a non interventionist foreign policy.

Well, he leans one hell of a lot more in that direction than Cruz.

Brett85
03-07-2016, 09:42 AM
Well, he leans one hell of a lot more in that direction than Cruz.

No he doesn't. For instance, if you just look at the issue of the war in Libya, Cruz has consistently opposed it and spoke out in opposition to it, while Trump originally thought that a humanitarian war to take out Gaddafi was a good idea.

William Tell
03-07-2016, 11:02 AM
Well, he leans one hell of a lot more in that direction than Cruz.

Bombing "the hell out them" and taking their oil is the opposite of non intervention.

LibertyEagle
03-07-2016, 11:09 AM
Bombing "the hell out them" and taking their oil is the opposite of non intervention.

He believes if we go to war, we should win it decisively and come home.

LibertyEagle
03-07-2016, 11:10 AM
No he doesn't. For instance, if you just look at the issue of the war in Libya, Cruz has consistently opposed it and spoke out in opposition to it, while Trump originally thought that a humanitarian war to take out Gaddafi was a good idea.

Don't even mention that traitorous piece of shit, Cruz, to me. He is a globalist through and through.

Brett85
03-07-2016, 11:33 AM
He believes if we go to war, we should win it decisively and come home.

Except that's the same position that Cruz takes, who you seem to hate.

Brett85
03-07-2016, 11:34 AM
Don't even mention that traitorous piece of shit, Cruz, to me. He is a globalist through and through.

You claimed that Trump is somehow more non interventionist than Cruz. I just pointed out that he isn't. Also, you don't even know where Trump stands because he's been on both sides of every issue. He supported both the Iraq War and the war in Libya before he decided to oppose those wars.

Cabal
03-07-2016, 01:23 PM
Because obviously you don't have to agree with someone on every single issue in order to support or endorse them.

Your sarcastic straw man isn't impressing anyone, and is only demonstrating your inability to adequately defend an obviously bad, and entirely inconsistent endorsement that you shouldn't be trying to defend in the first place.

Feeding the Abscess
03-07-2016, 04:00 PM
He believes if we go to war, we should win it decisively and come home.

Taking resources isn't winning a war and coming home. That's conquest. You don't snap your fingers and have those resources appear in your lap. You need to set up infrastructure or take over the remaining infrastructure in order for that to happen.

Krugminator2
03-07-2016, 04:06 PM
Your sarcastic straw man isn't impressing anyone, and is only demonstrating your inability to adequately defend an obviously bad, and entirely inconsistent endorsement that you shouldn't be trying to defend in the first place.

His comment wasn't a strawman. And there isn't anything inconsistent with Amash supporting Cruz. Cruz was the closest to libertarianism after Rand in the race. He is only few shades away from Amash. I think Cruz would be an outstanding President. Reasonable people can disagree about whether Cruz's hawkishness and questionable views on civil liberties are disqualifying but reasonable people can't disagree that Cruz is the next most libertarian candidate after Rand. If you are going to vote (which I do) then the choice is either Rand, as a protest vote, or Cruz. Amash chose Cruz. There is nothing wrong with Amash choosing Cruz.

Cabal
03-07-2016, 04:41 PM
Amash chose Cruz. There is nothing wrong with Amash choosing Cruz.

Certainly not if principles and consistency mean dick to you.

klamath
03-07-2016, 05:05 PM
Taking resources isn't winning a war and coming home. That's conquest. You don't snap your fingers and have those resources appear in your lap. You need to set up infrastructure or take over the remaining infrastructure in order for that to happen.
If there has been one thing consistent about Trumps statements over the years it is seizing oil. Just taking that into account shows his getting in and getting out statement as bullshit.
When we had a 170,000 troops in Iraq we could not stop insurgents from blowing wells and pipelines. The rivers there were always flowing oil.

Brett85
03-07-2016, 06:07 PM
Your sarcastic straw man isn't impressing anyone, and is only demonstrating your inability to adequately defend an obviously bad, and entirely inconsistent endorsement that you shouldn't be trying to defend in the first place.

I don't see how it's a straw man. Justin basically made the argument that even though Cruz isn't a non interventionist, he's more non interventionist than the other candidates in the race. If Justin feels like a President Cruz would cause less damage on the foreign policy front than a President Trump or a President Rubio, then how is it inconsistent for him to endorse Cruz over the other candidates?

Cabal
03-07-2016, 06:14 PM
Justin basically made the argument that even though Cruz isn't a non interventionist, he's more non interventionist than the other candidates in the race.

So incessantly talking about interventionism in the form of carpet bombings and saturation bombings, and waging a global war on terrorism is the acceptable amount of interventionism Justin Amash is willing to endorse on account of his "noninterventionist" principles?

Good to know.

Origanalist
03-07-2016, 06:21 PM
I don't see how it's a straw man. Justin basically made the argument that even though Cruz isn't a non interventionist, he's more non interventionist than the other candidates in the race. If Justin feels like a President Cruz would cause less damage on the foreign policy front than a President Trump or a President Rubio, then how is it inconsistent for him to endorse Cruz over the other candidates?

Sorry, I fail to see that whatsoever. I realize I started this thread but it was only in response to the ridiculous amount of Trump trolls here, not in support of Cruz in any way.

Brett85
03-07-2016, 06:31 PM
So incessantly talking about interventionism in the form of carpet bombings and saturation bombings, and waging a global war on terrorism is the acceptable amount of interventionism Justin Amash is willing to endorse on account of his "noninterventionist" principles?

Good to know.

Why is it an endorsement of interventionism to endorse a candidate who's less interventionist than the other candidates? He said in his endorsement that he disagrees with Cruz on some issues. He said that they don't always see eye to eye on foreign policy. But despite the fact that he made this clear in his endorsement, Amash is someone who supports an interventionist foreign policy simply because he endorsed Cruz over the other candidates left in the race?

But yes, focusing on saturation bombing actually is less interventionist than the other candidates since the other candidates are all advocating sending ground troops back to the Middle East.

Krugminator2
03-07-2016, 06:37 PM
So incessantly talking about interventionism in the form of carpet bombings and saturation bombings, and waging a global war on terrorism is the acceptable amount of interventionism Justin Amash is willing to endorse on account of his "noninterventionist" principles?

Good to know.


Cruz is very hawkish and apt to get us involved in conflict. That is very fair criticism. Foreign policy is one issue though. Every election for any office is a choice between imperfect options. Ron Paul, for instance, is worse than Chris Christie and Lindsay Graham on entitlement spending. I wouldn't consider it a compromise to support Ron. You have to make the best choice of what is available (if you are going to irrationally waste time voting.) If you are going to say "principles mean dick" to me, then you logically cannot support Ron Paul. Ron has plenty of deviations.

Origanalist
03-07-2016, 06:45 PM
Cruz is very hawkish and apt to get us involved in conflict. That is very fair criticism. Foreign policy is one issue though. Every election for any office is a choice between imperfect options. Ron Paul, for instance, is worse than Chris Christie and Lindsay Graham on entitlement spending. I wouldn't consider it a compromise to support Ron. You have to make the best choice of what is available (if you are going to irrationally waste time voting.) If you are going to say "principles mean dick" to me, then you logically cannot support Ron Paul. Ron has plenty of deviations.

Please provide some proof of this.

Krugminator2
03-07-2016, 07:04 PM
Please provide some proof of this.

Christie made it his signature issue. He mentioned it in a number of debates. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chris-christie-unveils-national-entitlement-reform-plan/
He pushed means testing and raising the age of eligibility pretty hard.

Ron never mentioned entitlement reform once unless he was asked and he gave a complete cop-out answer. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/289163/ron-paul-weak-entitlements-robert-verbruggen He basically said anyone under a certain age can opt-out and we should bring all the troops home to save money for entitlements. Neither one of things addresses the underfunding of Medicare at all. He basically told everyone what they wanted to hear. I don't want to derail the thread with this though. I was just using it as an example.

Rudeman
03-07-2016, 11:37 PM
You consider it good that he's supporting Cruz? Cruz is pure establishment and can't wait to pass more disastrous trade deals that will drive even more business and jobs out of the country.

I consider it good that he isn't supporting Trump.